research fundamentals Grants
Research
fundamentals
The art of obtaining grants
Emily Beth Devine
G
rant making is a multibilliondollar-per-year business. The
dollars involved are so large that
if grant making were a single firm, it
would rank near the top of the Fortune
500 list.1 This article describes the
grantsmanship process from beginning to end, from the perspective of
the investigator. It outlines strategies
that can be used to maximize the
chances of obtaining funding, suggests tools that can be used to identify funding opportunities, describes
several sources of available funding,
and offers guidance on writing and
submitting grant proposals. Guidance is provided that can be used to
manage grants and ensure compliance with the grant maker’s requirements. Finally, suggestions are made
to minimize the labor involved in
preparing presentations and manuscripts, the ultimate grant maker’s
requirement that ensures its money
has been wisely invested.
Strategies to maximize receipt of
funding
Successful grant writing involves
considerable preparation. Investigators must be knowledgeable of their
own interests, expertise, and workplace environment; what research
has already been conducted; and the
Purpose. The grantsmanship process is
described from the perspective of the
investigator.
Summary. Successful grant writing involves considerable preparation. There
are thousands of grant-making agencies,
both public and private, and many of the
grants offered can be found in online databases. Investigators should focus their
grant-seeking efforts on firms and research
subjects of interest. Factors that determine
the type of funding pursued include the
source of funds, the activity pursued by the
investigator, the research subject area, the
geographic area, the investigator’s career
level, the investigator’s affiliation with a
professional society, and the size of the
grant. To strategize for long-term success,
there are two ways a new investigator can
begin—by serving as a coinvestigator on
a grant held by a more-senior investigator
or by pursuing a small grant as a principal
investigator. When reviewing grant proposals, reviewers usually focus on a proposal’s
significance and impact, originality, useful-
grant maker’s interests. Months of
thought often go into each of these
aspects of preparation, as it takes
time for ideas to mature, team members to be identified, and proposals to
be solidified.
Ideally, grant proposals are written to explore the answers to research
Emily Beth Devine, Pharm.D., M.B.A., Ph.D., BCPS, FASHP, is Research Associate Professor, Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research and
Policy Program, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Box
357630, Seattle, WA 98195-7630 ([email protected]).
Supported by grant 1 K08 HS014739-01A2 from the Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality.
580
Am J Health-Syst Pharm—Vol 66 Mar 15, 2009
ness and generalizability, scope, approach
to research, feasibility, and sufficiency of
resources to complete the project. Once a
grant is awarded, investigators must ensure
they are well versed in conducting ethical
research, complying with regulations of
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, preparing human subjects
applications, managing grant budgets, and
managing the project and personnel. Most
grant makers require the presentation and
publication of project results.
Conclusion. Writing a grant proposal involves significant preparation. To be a successful grant writer, the investigator should
have a strong interest in the research topic
at hand. At the same time, he or she should
have a clear understanding of the sponsor’s
perspective and interests.
Index terms: Economics; Ethics; Grants;
Methodology; Regulations; Research;
Writing
Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2009; 66:580-7
questions in which the investigator
is genuinely interested. Without a
strong interest in the subject at hand,
it would be difficult to sustain the
effort necessary to carry a research
project through to completion. Thus,
the first step for grant seekers is to
identify their own research inter-
The author has declared no potential conflicts of interest.
Copyright © 2009, American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, Inc. All rights reserved. 1079-2082/09/0302-0580$06.00.
DOI 10.2146/ajhp070320
research fundamentals Grants
The Research Fundamentals section comprises a series of articles on important topics
in pharmacy research. These include valid
research design, appropriate data collection
and analysis, application of research findings
in practice, and publication of research results. Articles in this series have been solicited
and reviewed by guest editors Lee Vermeulen,
M.S., and Almut Winterstein, Ph.D.
ests. This soul-searching phase also
requires investigators to conduct an
adequate and accurate self-assessment
of their professional strengths, expertise, and past experiences. Acknowledging these strengths allows
grant seekers to assemble a team
with the complementary expertise to
engender the confidence of the grant
maker and to complete the proposed
project. Part of this self-assessment
includes ensuring that the department has sufficient interest in and
resources to support the proposed
project. Finally, complete familiarity
with the research area is necessary to
identify the relevant research questions at the forefront of the field and
understand how the proposed project will advance the field. Knowing
oneself, the available resources, and
the “state of the field” are necessary
to justify to the grant maker that its
dollars will be well spent.
After initial formulation of possible research questions, it is best to
jot down initial project ideas. Writing a paragraph or two, both about
the research question and the proposed methods for answering it, and
outlining the available and needed
resources are necessary steps. Only
after these thoughts have been committed to writing should the ideas be
shared with colleagues.
Grant makers are motivated by
specific goals that reflect the concerns
of the organizations they represent. It
is fundamental that grant seekers
align their interests with those of the
grant maker. Grant makers are interested in funding projects that bridge
gaps in existing knowledge. Too of-
ten, grant writers focus on their need
for funding instead of matching their
need with the sponsor’s priorities. To
pique the interest of the grant maker,
each proposal must be tailored to the
needs of the grant maker. In some
ways, being a grant writer is like being in business for yourself, in that
it involves selling your ideas and expertise to others. The next step is to
identify grant makers whose priorities are similar to your interests.
To determine how closely aligned
one’s project ideas are with those of
potential funding agencies, it is wise
to review a list of projects those agencies have recently funded. For private
foundations, this list is often posted
on the grant maker’s website. Projects funded by agencies that are part
of the Department of Health and
Human Services appear in a federally
sponsored database, the Computer
Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects (CRISP).2 CRISP is useful
for identifying existing projects, collaborators, and competitors. Another
widely used tool is offered by the
Community of Science (COS).3 COS
is a leading provider of information
resources to researchers, scholars,
and professionals around the globe.4
COS provides a platform that serves
over 1600 universities, corporations,
and government agencies worldwide
and provides services that enable
professionals to find funding, people,
and information important to the
scientific endeavor. The COS Database of Funded Research enables the
tracking of funding histories from
leading agencies around the world.3
Contacting the grant officer at the
funding agency is also recommended. An important aspect of grant officers’ jobs is to discuss research ideas
with potential investigators. Gauging
their enthusiasm and soliciting their
advice about how to frame a project
can help determine whether a project
will be funded.
Identifying grant opportunities
There are thousands of grant-
making agencies, both public and
private. A successful investigator
continuously scans the “research
horizon” for funding opportunities.
Learning how to do this is the most
difficult part of this phase; however,
once learned, keeping a vigilant eye
on upcoming funding opportunities
becomes easier.
It is often helpful to begin with
a broad search for funding, as this
helps grant seekers understand the
breadth of a field. Narrowing a search
from there can facilitate a greater understanding of the placement of one’s
work in the entire field. Two companies with Web-based databases—
COS 5 and GrantSelect 6—provide
a comprehensive list of funding
opportunities, both federal and
nonfederal. COS Funding Opportunities is the largest compendium of
information about available funding,
consisting of over 22,000 records and
400,000 funding opportunities worth
over $33 billion.5 Investigators can
create an individual profile outlining
their areas of expertise and research
interests and can receive a weekly
e-mail notification of a customized
list of funding opportunities based
on keywords and criteria provided
by the member.7 Individual membership is free, and registration is simple.
GrantSelect provides a list of over
10,000 public and private funding
opportunities and requires a membership fee.6 University memberships
are available for both databases.
Private foundations. Private
grants come from foundations and
corporations.1 There are over 43,000
private foundations in the United
States, offering over $8 billion in research funding annually. To maintain
their tax-exempt status, foundations
must distribute at least 5% of their
market value in assets or interest
income annually, which motivates
them to fund research that furthers
their missions. The websites of two
major organizations—the Foundation Center8 and the Council on
Foundations9—have links to such
Am J Health-Syst Pharm—Vol 66 Mar 15, 2009
581
research fundamentals Grants
foundations. Corporations, on the
other hand, are for-profit entities and
provide grants to further the business
at hand. In contrast to the moreformal grant application processes
and timelines followed by government agencies and private foundations, the opportunity to obtain a
corporate grant often arises as an unstructured opportunity and hinges
on personal contacts, networking,
and the ability to sell an idea.
There are several pharmacy foundations that provide support for pharmacists in training, in
early career development, and in
practice-based research (Table 1).
The American Society of HealthSystem Pharmacists (ASHP) Research
and Education Foundation offers
a junior investigator award and a
practice-based research award for
pharmacy residents, as well as other
types of awards.10 The ASHP Research and Education Foundation
also sponsors a “research boot camp,”
a research-skills-development training program. The American College
of Clinical Pharmacy Research Institute offers awards for new investigators and for pharmacists pursuing
further career development.11 The
American Association of Colleges of
Pharmacy offers a new investigator
award for pharmacy faculty,12 while
the American Foundation for Pharmaceutical Education offers several
awards to undergraduate and graduate pharmacy students pursuing research careers and advanced research
training.13 The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association Foundation offers starter grants
in several areas of study.14 Additional
information about eligibility and application deadlines is also available
from the websites of each of these
foundations.
Pharmaceutical industry. Many
pharmaceutical companies will consider funding small studies from
their limited project budgets. These
are best identified by establishing networking ties with industry582
Table 1.
Funding Sources for Pharmacist Investigators
Grant Maker
American Society of HealthSystem Pharmacists Research
and Education Foundation10
American College of Clinical
Pharmacy Research Institute11
American Association of Colleges
of Pharmacy12
American Foundation for
Pharmaceutical Education13
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers
Association Foundation14
Grant Name or Description
New investigator grant programs
• Federal Services Junior Investigator
Research Award
• Junior Investigator Research Award
• Pharmacy Resident Practice-based
Research Award
Medication Safety Team Grant
Research Boot Camp
Hospital Pharmacist–Hospitalist
Collaboration in Improving Glycemic Control
Investigator Development Research Award
Frontiers Career Development Research
Award
New Investigators Program for Pharmacy
Faculty
Pharm.D. and undergraduate “Gateway to
Research” scholarships
First-year graduate school scholarships
Research starter grants in
• Health outcomes
• Informatics
• Pharmacology and toxicology
• Pharmaceutics
employed colleagues at the local and
regional levels and, of course, finding
a study that is of interest to both the
investigator and the firm. Although
funds from these sources are not as
readily available as they once were,
several divisions in these companies
have educational grants in their annual budgets. It is worth checking
with managed care liaisons, medical
sciences liaisons, and regional account managers, even from the same
firm, as the budget for each area is
often separate.
Federal funding opportunities.
Sources of federal funding are listed
on several websites, the most useful
of which are those of the Office of
Extramural Research of the National Institutes of Health (NIH)15
and the National Science Foundation.16 Each of these websites offers
a plethora of information about the
agency and its priorities, and it is
well worth the time spent to familiarize oneself with these resources if
Am J Health-Syst Pharm—Vol 66 Mar 15, 2009
embarking on a research career. Additional sources of federal funding
opportunities are listed on the websites of the Department of Defense
(e.g., Air Force,17 Army18) and the
Department of Health and Human
Services (e.g., Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality [AHRQ], 19
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention,20 Health Resources and
Services Administration21).
Staying abreast of the
grant-making landscape
Investigators should focus their
grant-seeking efforts on firms and
research subjects of interest. Registering to receive a weekly e-mail from
any interested agencies can greatly
streamline the requirement to stay
current in the grant-seeking business. In addition, once an investigator becomes familiar with firms of
interest, a periodic visit to the firm’s
website is warranted. Experienced
grant seekers are often familiar with
research fundamentals Grants
the funding cycles of federal and
private funding agencies of interest
and intermittently check the websites
of these organizations. Universities
often have specific resources devoted to assisting faculty and health
professionals in obtaining research
funding. These resources can include
assistance with database searches and
information about funding alerts,
grant-writing workshops, and educational sessions about obtaining and
managing grant funds. Grant seekers practicing in a university setting
should consider using these valuable
resources. Universities often serve as
grant makers as well.
Sources of funding
Grants come in all shapes and
sizes, and there are several ways to
decide on the type of funding to pursue. By categorizing funding opportunities, an investigator can develop a
strategy that maximizes success. Factors that determine the type of funding pursued include (1) the source of
funds (e.g., federal, private, corporate), (2) the activity pursued by the
investigator (e.g., conference, specific
project, program infrastructure), (3)
the research subject area (e.g., diabetes research funded by The American Diabetes Association Research
Foundation22), (4) the geographic
area (e.g., The Seattle Foundation,
found through the Grantsmanship
Center23), (5) the investigator’s career
level (e.g., junior versus senior investigator grants), (6) the investigator’s
affiliation with a specific professional
society (e.g., ASHP Research and
Education Foundation10), and (7) the
size of the grant. These factors are
not mutually exclusive, and several
will apply for any given grant.
Federal grants offered through
NIH and AHRQ are categorized by
a “mechanism,” a term used to describe the intended scope, size, eligibility, and funding commitments of
the grant. Training grants from these
agencies are sometimes awarded to
institutions rather than to individual
investigators,24 and pharmacists and
pharmacy students are eligible to apply. A popular traineeship is the T32,
which is intended to develop clinical
researchers ranging in experience
from prelicensure to postdoctoral
levels. The F31 and F32 provide predoctoral and postdoctoral funding,
respectively.25 The K-series is a set
of career-development awards that
supports investigators who are developing careers as independent investigators.26 T32 and K12 grants are held
by the academic institution; F31, F32,
and K08 grants are held by individual
trainees. Application for these grants
is made with an investigator’s institution or directly from the federal
government, respectively. NIH and
AHRQ also offer several types of full
investigator awards—small grants
(R03), exploratory and developmental grants (R21), and independent
research project grants (R01).27
In addition to a grant’s mechanism, each grant opportunity is
identified as either a program announcement (PA) or a request for
application (RFA). PAs remain open
for an extended period of time and
are structured to attract independent
investigators to apply for funding in
a broadly defined area, the details of
which are left to the investigator to
propose. RFAs are used to announce
one-time opportunities and intended
to motivate applicants to study a
specific area outlined in the RFA.
Not all NIH institutes and centers
offer the same grant opportunities,
so knowing the institute or center
funding a specific opportunity is also
important.
Pharmacists possess a unique
knowledge base that assists them in
conducting clinical, translational,
and health services research. Despite
this training, few pharmacist investigators receive competitive federal
research funding. Schools of pharmacy collectively receive less than
1% of NIH’s budget for extramural
research.28 To address this disparity,
NIH sponsored a landmark confer-
ence in December 2006. Attendees at
this conference discussed ways to increase the research skills of pharmacy
school graduates so that they can
become competitive investigators. A
summary of the conference proceedings is posted on an NIH Web page
titled “Pharm.D. Gateway to NIH.”28
This website also provides more detail on several funding opportunities
for pharmacists, many of which are
mentioned above. This conference
and website herald a new era in the
recognition of pharmacist investigators as potential research scientists.
Which strategy? Coinvestigator
versus principal investigator
To strategize for long-term success,
there are two ways a new investigator
can begin—by serving as a coinvestigator on a grant held by a moresenior investigator or by pursuing a
small grant as a principal investigator. There are advantages to each. Becoming a coinvestigator on an existing grant provides an opportunity to
learn how to conduct research from
qualified mentors, without the stress
of ultimate project responsibility.
Alternatively, seeking seed money for
one’s own project can provide the full
experience of project responsibility
on a small scale. Foundations that are
associated with professional pharmacy organizations have an additional
incentive, as they are invested in the
career development of pharmacists,
and provide seed money to support
young investigators working under
the mentorship of more-senior colleagues. From the grant maker’s
perspective, providing seed money
in small grants minimizes its risk of
investing in an investigator who is
just beginning to build a track record.
From the investigator’s perspective,
seed money provides funding to
conduct a pilot project, the results of
which can demonstrate the need for
a larger study, while simultaneously
proving that the investigator has the
tenacity to complete a project. Most
major grants require the submission
Am J Health-Syst Pharm—Vol 66 Mar 15, 2009
583
research fundamentals Grants
of pilot data in the grant proposal,
and the best way to obtain these data
is often through the seed money provided by a starter grant.
Writing and submitting grant
proposals
The format and length of a grant
proposal are dictated by the funding
agency. Proposals submitted to private foundations are short (usually
a few pages) and focus on describing
the problem and proposed solution.
Proposals submitted to federal agencies can include up to 25 pages of text
for the research plan,29 plus supporting documents. Reviewing one or
more proposals previously submitted by a colleague can be extremely
helpful in learning how to write one.
In all cases, follow the instructions
of the grant maker, paying close
attention to every detail outlined.
Proposals can be returned without
review if guidelines are not closely
followed, and reviewers look more
favorably upon a proposal written in
the required format. Attention must
also be focused on the appearance
of the proposal. The use of suggested
fonts, sufficient white space, headers,
bold type, ragged right margins, and
bulleted lists all make for easy reading and facilitate a positive response
from reviewers. A succinct writing
style, well-formulated hypotheses,
evidence of past productivity, and
knowledge of proposed analytic
techniques, as well as good grammar
and correct spelling, are essential.
Miner and Miner30 authored a very
useful guide on the details of writing
a proposal. Finally, if grant makers’
instructions are not clear, their office staff are often helpful in offering
guidance before the grant deadline.
A successful grant application is
an exercise in communication, and
it is incumbent on investigators to
communicate their ideas clearly.
Even with short proposals, the use of
an outline can improve clarity. The
standard outline, based on an NIH
template,29 includes a cover letter,
584
either from the investigator or an
institutional official; an abstract; a
list of project-specific aims; the background and context for the research,
including a description of the gap
the proposed research is intended to
fill; the significance of the work; and
a summary of preliminary data. The
outline is followed by the research
plan and a section describing how
the project will adhere to the principles of ethical research practice
for human subjects. Other required
components include references,
budgets and budget justifications, a
description of the research environment, and a biographical sketch for
each investigator. Appendixes include
letters of support from collaborators,
templates of data-collection tools,
and investigator-published articles
related to the same research area. Often, space is reserved to describe the
credibility of the organization and
the investigators, sometimes serving as an introduction to frame the
proposal.
The research plan begins with
a reiteration and more-complete
description of each specific aim. Sufficient detail should be included at
this point so that reviewers can see
how the outcome will be measured.
For example, rather than stating, “We
will evaluate the impact of electronic
prescribing on medication errors in
the ambulatory care environment,”
the research plan should state, “By
reviewing 10,000 prescriptions from
three family practice clinics, we will
determine the impact of electronic
prescribing on medication errors,
as identified using the taxonomy
established by the National Coordinating Council on Medication Error
Reporting and Prevention31; we will
consider a reduction in the error rate
of 25% to be significant.” Following
this are definitions of the dependent
variable (outcome) and the independent variable (explanatory) and
descriptions of the data sources, inclusion and exclusion criteria, evaluation methods, data management,
Am J Health-Syst Pharm—Vol 66 Mar 15, 2009
data analysis (to include a power
calculation if applicable), potential
challenges and alternative plans, dissemination plans, and limitations.
A timeline, coupled with a task list,
should also be included. Dissemination plans are an important component, as they help grant makers envision the return on their investment.
Investigators should be as specific as
possible about the meetings at which
preliminary results will be presented
and about the journals targeted for
manuscript publication. A word of
caution: Never submit a grant that
has not “matured”; if it has not undergone sufficient internal review
and revision, do not submit it. Wait
until the next opportunity. Submitting a proposal that is not polished
will diminish credibility and reduce
future chances of success.
Budgets are often very specific and
include salaries for personnel, equipment, supplies, travel to the field site,
travel to meetings to present results,
and educational support, as allowed.
Each aspect of the budget must be
sufficiently justified to ensure accountability to the grant maker; time
frames must be included. Justifying the proportion and duration of
each individual’s time is critical. It
is appropriate to obtain a firm commitment from coinvestigators at this
juncture to prevent misunderstandings about time commitments after
the award has been made. Costs usually include those used to directly
support the project, as listed above
(direct costs), and those that will be
charged to institutional overhead (indirect costs). More complex budget
processes may include subcontracts
with an outside entity or cost sharing
with a collaborating institution. To
be competitive, always stay within the
budget constraints proposed by the
grant maker.
Depending on the length of the
proposal, complexity of the research,
and experience of the investigator, a grant proposal may take one
to six months to write. Writing the
research fundamentals Grants
research plan is only half the task.
The remaining tasks also take considerable time—preparing budgets,
assembling supporting documents,
and submitting material online. It
is best to involve coinvestigators
and administrators from the outset.
Coinvestigators can assist with the
development of the research plan
and revise and improve drafts of the
plan, while administrators can assist
with budget preparation, document
assembling, obtaining institutional
approval (which can take up to two
weeks), and electronic submission.
Newly launched online submission
requirements 32,33 require advance
registration and have a learning
curve that requires familiarization
before the final uploading of documents. Do not get discouraged; grant
writing usually becomes easier with
experience, and one proposal can
leverage the next.
Grant review
Sometimes the grant maker will
ask for a letter of intent, a one-page
summary of the overall project idea,
research aims, and personnel. This
letter assists the grant maker in convening a panel of reviewers whose
expertise will be aligned with the
proposal submitted. The reviewers
evaluate each proposal using predefined criteria (announced in the
request for proposals). Reviewers
usually focus on the following areas
when reviewing grant proposals: (1)
significance and impact, (2) originality, (3) usefulness and generalizability, (4) scope, (5) approach to
research, (6) feasibility (expertise and
experience of the research team), and
(7) sufficiency of resources to complete the project. The review can take
three to six months.
The waiting period is difficult
but should be a time of planning.
Plan for both funding and rejection,
as this will provide options for the
future. If funded, what will it take
to launch the project? If rejected,
are revision and resubmission al-
lowed or encouraged? If not, would
a different grant maker be interested
in a similar proposal? After thinking through these questions, it is
best to move on to other projects
and activities while waiting. In the
interim, it is acceptable to submit
the proposal to a different sponsor; however, if both proposals are
funded, each budget must cover
different aspects of the work or the
scope of work must be increased to
prevent overlap.
Decisions are usually returned
with comments that are usually useful for revising and resubmitting to
the same (if allowed) or a different
grant maker. If it is the grant maker’s
policy, it is sometimes acceptable
to call the grant maker to have a
debriefing. This conversation will
sometimes provide information that
does not come through on paper,
such as the grant maker’s enthusiasm
for the project. There is no reason to
resubmit if the response was lukewarm, unless the grant maker’s concerns can be substantially addressed
in a subsequent version. More than
one resubmission is not recommended and not often allowed. If
not successful at this juncture, it may
be time to move on to another idea.
No investigator receives funding for
all grants submitted. Take comments
constructively, and revise and resubmit your proposal, but beware of the
law of diminishing returns.
Grants management
Being awarded a grant presents
a different set of challenges. Being a
principal investigator means having
responsibility for all aspects of grants
management: ensuring scientific
rigor of the research project at hand,
performing accurate data collection
and correct analysis, preparing and
delivering presentations, and drafting
and submitting manuscripts—all duties normally of interest to scientists.
But the principal investigator must
also be well versed in (1) conducting
ethical research,34 (2) complying with
regulations of the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act
(HIPAA), 35 (3) preparing human
subjects applications, (4) managing
grant budgets, and (5) managing
the project and personnel. Gaining familiarity with these aspects of
research while awaiting the results
of the funding decision is time well
spent.
Principal investigators must have
personally received training in the
ethical conduct of research with human subjects and must ensure that
all key personnel on the research
team have done the same.34 Although
these requirements are for holders of
grants sponsored by the Department
of Health and Human Services, most
research institutions have adopted
similar requirements for investigators holding grants from other grant
makers. Many institutions have
developed their own educational
programs that meet this requirement
or contracted with an institution
that does. It is also incumbent on
the investigator to become certified
as a researcher familiar with HIPAA
regulations.35 Excellent resources on
the ethical conduct of research can
be found on the website of the NIH
Office of Human Research Protections36; information about HIPAA
regulations is available from the NIH
website for HIPAA resources.37 Approval from the local investigational
review board to conduct research is
required for each research project
involving humans. Completing these
applications seems onerous at first,
but expertise in completing them efficiently is gained over time.
The principal investigator is responsible for all fiscal aspects of the
project, for hiring and overseeing the
work of project personnel, and for
all project management tasks. Most
grant makers require periodic status
reports on grants they have funded,
including both a description of the
scientific progress and a budget
update. To assist investigators with
this myriad of duties, most research
Am J Health-Syst Pharm—Vol 66 Mar 15, 2009
585
research fundamentals Grants
institutions offer training programs
in the ethical conduct of research in
humans, compliance with HIPAA
regulations, and budget management. New investigators should make
use of these resources.
Manuscript preparation
Most grant makers require the
presentation and publication of
project results. Although guidance
about how to draft a manuscript is
not within the scope of this report, a
short description of the overlap between grant and manuscript writing
is. A grant proposal requires many
of the same components as a manuscript. The one-paragraph project
overview from the proposal can
begin the abstract of a manuscript.
The literature review that formed the
background section of the proposal
can be used to create the introduction and discussion sections of the
manuscript. The research plan and
human subjects application can serve
as the methods section. The poster
or podium presentations of initial
results (complete with peer feedback
obtained in these venues) can form
the results section. Much of the
manuscript is often completed before the manuscript-writing process
actually begins. Authors should also
acknowledge the sponsor in poster
and podium presentations and
manuscripts.
Another strategy to facilitate
manuscript writing is the “threeparagraph rule” (i.e., write no more
than three paragraphs per section).
The introduction should contain
the background and end with the
project objectives. The methods and
results sections should be limited to
three paragraphs each. The discussion section should recapitulate the
results, compare the results to those
of other investigators, and end with
study limitations. A one-paragraph
conclusion and a one-paragraph abstract are written last. The first draft
is the most difficult to write. Authors
should strive for brevity and clarity,
586
select an appropriate journal, and
then submit their manuscript.
Conclusion
Writing a grant proposal involves
significant preparation. To be a successful grant writer, the investigator
should have a strong interest in the
research topic at hand. At the same
time, he or she should have a clear
understanding of the sponsor’s perspective and interests.
References
1. Miner JT, Miner LE. A guide to proposal
planning and writing. www.wm.edu/
grants/PROP/miner.pdf (accessed 2009
Jan 20).
2. National Institutes of Health. Computer
Retrieval of Information on Scientific
Projects (CRISP). http://crisp.cit.nih.gov/
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
3. Community of Science. Homepage.
www.cos.com (accessed 2009 Jan 20).
4. Community of Science. Who we are.
www.cos.com/about/ (accessed 2009 Jan
20).
5. Community of Science. COS funding opportunities. http://fundingopps.cos.com/
about/fundingopps.shtml (accessed 2009
Jan 20).
6. GrantSelect. Find funding for your programs. www.grantselect.com (accessed
2009 Jan 20).
7. Community of Science. COS services.
www.cos.com/services/ (accessed 2009
Jan 20).
8. Foundation Center. Find funders. http://
foundat ioncenter.org/findfunders
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
9. Council on Foundations. www.cof.org/
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
10. American Society of Health-System
Pharmacists Research and Education
Foundation. Funding opportunities.
www.ashpfoundation.org/MainMenu
Categories/ResearchResourceCenter/
FundingOpportunities.aspx (accessed
2009 Jan 20).
11. American College of Clinical Pharmacy.
AACP Research Institute. www.accp.com/
frontiers/research.php (accessed 2009 Jan
20).
12. American Association of Colleges of
Pharmacy. New investigators program
for pharmacy faculty. www.aacp.org/site/
page.asp?TRACKID=&VID=1&CID=37
2&DID=3593 (accessed 2009 Jan 20).
13. American Foundation for Pharmaceutical Education. Programs. www.afpenet.
org/programs.htm (accessed 2009 Jan
20).
14. PhRMA Foundation. Online application
process. www.phrmafoundation.org/
applyonline/?page=main (accessed 2009
Jan 20).
15. National Institutes of Health. Funding opportunities and notices. http://
Am J Health-Syst Pharm—Vol 66 Mar 15, 2009
grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/index.html
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
16. National Science Foundation. Find funding. www.nsf.gov/funding (accessed 2009
Jan 20).
17. Air Force Office of Scientific Research.
Funding overview. www.wpafb.af.mil/
library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=8981
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
18. Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs. Research programs.
http://cdmrp.army.mil/research.htm
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
19. Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality. Funding opportunities. www.
ahrq.gov/fund/ (accessed 2009 Jan 20).
20. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Grants, funding, and procurement.
www.cdc.gov/about/business/funding.
htm (accessed 2009 Jan 20).
21. Health Resources and Services Administration. Grants: find, apply, review,
manage, report. www.hrsa.gov/grants/
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
22. The American Diabetes Association
Research Foundation. Homepage.
www.diabetes.org/diabetes-research/
ADA-Research-Foundation/research
foundation.jsp (accessed 2009 Jan 20).
23. The Grantsmanship Center. Funding
sources. http://tgci.com/funding.shtml
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
24. National Institutes of Health. NIH research training and research career development. http://grants2.nih.gov/training/
index.htm (accessed 2009 Jan 20).
25. Office of Extramural Research. Ruth L.
Kirschstein National Research Service
Award (NRSA). http://grants.nih.gov/
training/nrsa.htm (accessed 2009 Jan
20).
26. Office of Extramural Research. K Kiosk—
information about NIH career development awards. http://grants.nih.gov/
training/careerdevelopmentawards.htm
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
27. Office of Extramural Research. Types of
grant programs. http://grants1.nih.gov/
grants/funding/funding_program.htm
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
28. National Institute of General Medical
Sciences. Pharm.D. gateway to NIH.
www.nigms.nih.gov/training/pharmd_
gateway.htm (accessed 2009 Jan 20).
29. Office of Extramural Research. SF424
(R&R) application and electronic
su bmissi on infor mat ion. h t t p : //
grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/424/
index.htm (accessed 2009 Jan 20).
30. Miner JT, Miner LE. Proposal planning
and writing, 3rd ed. Westport, CT: Greenwood; 2003.
31. National Coordinating Council on Medication Error Reporting and Prevention.
NCCMERP taxonomy of medication
errors. www.nccmerp.org/pdf/taxo200107-31.pdf (accessed 2009 Jan 20).
32. Grants.gov. Get registered. www.grants.
g ov / a p p l i c a n t s / g e t _ re g i s te re d . j s p
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
33. Federal Financial Assistance Management Improvement Act of 1999.
research fundamentals Grants
34.
35.
36.
37.
Public Law 106–107—Nov. 20, 1999.
www.grants.gov/section3/PL106107.pdf
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
National Institutes of Health. Required
education in the protection of human research participants. Notice: OD-00-039.
http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/guide/
notice-files/NOT-OD-00-039.html
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
Office for Civil Rights. Title 45 Code
of Federal Regulations, Parts 160 and
164. Standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information.
www.hhs.gov/ocr/combinedregtext.pdf
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
Office for Human Research Protections. Homepage. www.hhs.gov/ohrp/
(accessed 2009 Jan 20).
National Institutes of Health. HIPAA
resources. http://privacyruleandresearch.
nih.gov/default.asp (accessed 2009 Jan
20).
Am J Health-Syst Pharm—Vol 66 Mar 15, 2009
587